Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Uas Program Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Appropriations panel gives do-pass to House Bill 1038 after briefing on statewide drone program costs
Summary
The Senate Appropriations Committee voted to recommend House Bill 1038 after hearing cost estimates for a statewide unmanned aircraft systems program. The Northern Plains UAS Test Site would administer the program; the bill totals $26 million but does not include a recently added $2 million enterprise data-management amendment.
The North Dakota Senate Appropriations Committee voted to give a "do pass" recommendation to House Bill 1038 after committee members heard detailed cost estimates for a proposed statewide unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) program.
Deputy Executive Director Aaron Raessler presented the committee with a multi-part cost breakdown, saying, "In front of you, you have the cost estimates" and walking members through components including program administration, inventory establishment, threat and vulnerability assessment, and training. The committee was told the bill is structured in two sections that together total $26,000,000 in appropriations (roughly $15 million and $11 million by section), while a software amendment added in committee would impose additional recurring costs that are not included in the $26 million appropriation.
Why it matters: HB 1038 would fund replacement and centralized management of state agency drones and related systems, and it would designate the Northern Plains UAS Test Site to administer the program. Committee members pressed for clarity about ownership and contracting, and for assurance that the appropriation matched recently added requirements.
The bill authorizes three broad work streams, according to testimony: (1) administration and centralized system management and inventory; (2) inspections, threat and vulnerability assessments, and guidance for advanced operations; and (3) replacement of aircraft and supporting systems. Raessler said the bill team reviewed agency inventories and estimated 307 aircraft would need replacement: about 75 low-end units at roughly $1,000 each, 150 mid-range systems at about $30,000 each, and 82 higher-end aircraft at about $50,000 each — producing a replacement-subtotal of about $15,675,000 for hardware and support equipment.
Deputy Executive Director Aaron Raessler told the panel that "this estimate breaks down to... of the 307 needing replacement" and emphasized the program will require batteries, sensors and spares in addition to airframes. Committee discussion confirmed that the inventory items would remain state assets; Raessler said the Northern Plains UAS Test Site would not take ownership of state equipment. As he summarized, "They won't be owned by the Northern Plains Test Site. They will be owned by the agencies."
On program management, Sarah Matheson said section 2 reflects continuation of existing contract work administered by the Northern Plains UAS Test Site and related contractors, and that some tasks will be contracted out when staffing or scale makes that more efficient. Matheson said the work "has been competitively bid" and the program has used master agreements and task orders since about 2020.
Committee members repeatedly asked whether the test site would perform work in-house or subcontract it. Matheson and Raessler said some tasks will likely be contracted, and that the test site does not currently have all personnel required to perform every element without outside contracts or new hires.
Committee members also asked about a late amendment to provide an enterprise end-to-end data-management solution. Raessler said a supplier estimate for that software is about $2,000,000 annually and that the enterprise solution estimate represents a 60–70% government discount; he emphasized that the $2,000,000 annual cost is not part of the $26,000,000 appropriation because the software amendment was added after the original fiscal estimate.
Senators raised concerns about the flow of funds and use of Commerce as the passthrough agency; Senator Megraham said he was "against putting more money with commerce because they haven't proven themselves the last couple years," while Senator Mather pressed whether the Commerce Department would subcontract quickly if the program lost funding. Senator Burley and others asked whether the $2,000,000 enterprise-software estimate had been included in fiscal notes; Raessler said it had not.
After discussion, Senator Sickler moved the committee to recommend passage; Senator Connolly seconded. The committee voted 11–5 to give HB 1038 a do-pass recommendation. The motion was recorded as "Motion passed 11 5 0."
